Patna High Court
Vikash Rajwansi @ Vikash Rajwar @ Vikash KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Vikash Rajwansi, applied for anticipatory bail after being implicated in a FIR alleging theft and assault on a neighbour's father, resulting in serious head injuries. He claimed the allegations were false and motivated by a land dispute, and pointed to the lack of specificity in the assault charge. The State opposed the bail, highlighting the seriousness of the injuries, the petitioner’s two prior criminal cases, and contrasting his antecedents with a co‑accused who had been granted bail due to a clean record. The court examined the nature of the injuries, the petitioner’s criminal history, and the principle of parity in bail decisions. Concluding that the petitioner’s antecedents and the gravity of the alleged assault warranted denial, the court rejected the anticipatory bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner given the seriousness of the alleged offences and his prior criminal record
- Whether parity with a co‑accused who was granted bail is applicable when the co‑accused has a clean antecedent
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 109, 115(2), 118, 126, 3(5), 352
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Indian Penal Code
- criminal antecedent
- parity in bail
- assault
- injury
- land dispute
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66520 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-53 Year-2025 Thana- PALIGANJ District- Patna
======================================================
Vikash Rajwansi @ Vikash Rajwar @ Vikash Kumar S/o Vijay Rajwansi R/o
Village - Bibipur, Sarsi, P.S - Paliganj, District - Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vishal Ranjan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Navin Kumar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 10-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126,
115(2), 118, 109, 352 and 3(5) of BNS.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of two cases and the informant alleges
that on 27.01.2025, while his father was guarding paddy in his
Khalihan, when petitioner along with co-accused persons came
and tried to commit theft of the paddy crop, on objection, it is
alleged that his father was assaulted by lathi and sword on
account of which he sustained injuries.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66520 of 2025(4) dt.10-02-2026
2/3
allegation as alleged in the F.I.R., it would manifest that on
account of dispute relating to land, the accused persons
including the petitioner has been implicated in the case by the
informant. It is also submitted petitioner and the informant are
neighbours. It is next submitted that no doubt allegation of
assaulting the father of the informant is alleged, but then
allegation of assault is not specific. It is further submitted that
from perusal of the order impugned, it would manifest that the
injury suffered by the father of the informant has been opined to
be simple in nature caused by sharp weapon and thereafter the
father of the informant also got treated at PMCH where CT Scan
was done and the same recorded multiple fracture in Zygoma,
left parietal bone and transverse fracture along the occipital
bone.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the
anticipatory bail application and submits that the order
impugned records about the nature of injury suffered by the
father of the informant, but then also describes the injury as
recorded in the injury report and from perusal of the same, it
would manifest that though the injury has been opined to be
simple in nature, but then the same records multiple fracture in
Zygoma, left parietal bone and transverse fracture along the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66520 of 2025(4) dt.10-02-2026
3/3
occipital bone, it is next submitted that it appears that the father
of the informant was assaulted brutally leading to the injuries. It
is further submitted that though allegation of assault is not
specific, but then petitioner has antecedent of two cases, on
which the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
submits that similarly situated co-accused Vijay Rajwanshi had
approached this Court seeking anticipatory bail by filing
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 63928 of 2025 and the same came
to be allowed by an order dated 23.09.2025, thus, based on
parity seeks anticipatory bail, on which the learned APP submits
that Vijay Rajwanshi was granted the privilege of anticipatory
bail, since he was a person with clean antecedent whereas the
instant petitioner is having antecedent of two cases.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
APP for the State, the Court is not inclined to extend the
privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail
application stands rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…